[netmod] Issues with draft-ietf-netmod-nmda-diff-00

Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com> Tue, 06 November 2018 17:31 UTC

Return-Path: <andy@yumaworks.com>
X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26FEE12F1AB for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Nov 2018 09:31:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=yumaworks-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5DOLg8SMa-tW for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Nov 2018 09:31:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lj1-x234.google.com (mail-lj1-x234.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0949E130934 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Tue, 6 Nov 2018 09:31:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lj1-x234.google.com with SMTP id z80-v6so12189200ljb.8 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Tue, 06 Nov 2018 09:31:22 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yumaworks-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=lVcYmI2b7ylyA2XesBidy9gTKYhgN8I7ga9A5rbL1EY=; b=WDNSePvgK9BqWVNcP6giWTyeBwxHimdNN02mSDKn+AVG9rC46PeuV0aA21lodNkWPd sosq3W2uwjBNb1InQWohkQWIr4I3kGBDJIHpNBXLmLBF4jzDnTFItEsohcUJNTI83jW6 IHhGwL2lO7F30lPaf2ETGuRxkJCuv4m1CviWXd0YoebzeHRs2fNJQqrrkbvkwQq2wDlk HOya2sqmtuzuuJc8H5Rp89kEcRI+c1QY56uGqZxymYMsuXjboAQ1ySiBJYGGUxWbmbl0 gn1AiaDB+OeYnyprogYJtTMWT1WMtuSX8JLa96eHdNAxj4ShLfAkxF3AoCr+MHpQGtvi eflA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=lVcYmI2b7ylyA2XesBidy9gTKYhgN8I7ga9A5rbL1EY=; b=BnY8c0FIWeo3bEcwEiPjYb8l7OzCe2rz+6vylveZ/4V3EvZF28NHP+ISrK6bQcGo3S eyOiDz/M+57qWLmQ6qrOOzMgWqPuaYOzdTnnXxZgRAGRCABJSPQFstxMo+Ujq1OzUHLU h3Rdb2ujOjtHXCSi5Cxx+t4VKvIrf5YRiG9Zb8ikEJu4CXI79tvVnLUeLzI/K3/yQ+fe gkAHccgCDmzCiIot8SHH/Kqi91JNjF1bRFjeSsZqNLis9dM4z3deBCgcqqpmt95deLnS /ogS4iIBL55cNQPanWeAkrgvfvg4Z1MgjJn3I/7p3+iKiByf3w39iAkNa9TwVcWK21oy VjSg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AGRZ1gKNkvGmQCzbCRpqyVd3uXgUtY3hTKH/9M46hofEPA0bic4B94yO z2hCiOJIwE+dKo1xJ76T7WyFweBGTPMK4KBxHcnxUhD5
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AJdET5eJJzjnZ6t0iwh6vqPZvUfPdlzzn+a2ZRqRLZ/rchQj2zvyi9BtvYhgl49r3agP8BJWWIbX9v45i3qJfEqPt58=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:2019:: with SMTP id g25-v6mr16708398ljg.20.1541525480483; Tue, 06 Nov 2018 09:31:20 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 2002:a19:1f87:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Tue, 6 Nov 2018 09:31:19 -0800 (PST)
From: Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2018 09:31:19 -0800
Message-ID: <CABCOCHSedhq1bZBn6ZCERinC8gTUb+gXuMVvNs8p_SWqPdbyRQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: NetMod WG <netmod@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000ad4e3f057a025ea0"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/MOc-0tqdxpEU1TbT_CYFUSBlIQw>
Subject: [netmod] Issues with draft-ietf-netmod-nmda-diff-00
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETMOD WG list <netmod.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netmod/>
List-Post: <mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2018 17:31:27 -0000

Hi,

I understand the WG is going to delay this work 1 or 2 meetings to
see if any proposals for a diff format are proposed.

Any diff command assumes some algorithm that requires:
  (1) copy of the source document
  (2) set of diffs against the source document
  (3) procedure for applying diffs

With this information the tool can produce the target document.

The WG has to decide if this <compare> operation is for
textual representation of a datastore or is it a conceptual compare
of a datastore.  They are not the same.

The first problem that comes up with a textual compare is document order.
There is no defined order for top-level data nodes within a datastore.
There is no defined order for augmenting nodes which are siblings.

The next problem is that some data types have no canonical representation.

A textual compare will be affected by both types of false positives.

So while we are waiting up to 8 months for proposals...
What problem is this new diff format trying to solve?


Andy